Separately, Pompeo described WikiLeaks as a “non-state hostile intelligence service”. ... as opposed to a certain state-hostile intelligence service
Sweden tried to drop Assange extradition in 2013
141–150 of 160 posts
Re: Sweden tried to drop Assange extradition in 2013
#142Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting. I note it's from 2012 but guess could still be current. Thank you for supplying the link. Again though, seems odd they would need to keep it sealed. I wonder what Assange would actually want to do regards to what would happen after he leaves the embassy (legal issues aside). I can't think there are many countries that would allow him entry, bar Ecuador and possibly Russia. Most likely Russia I'd assume a…
> Again though, seems odd they would need to keep it sealed. Why would they unseal it?
Given all the allegations that have been made, there will be intense media attention on any extradition case. I would have thought having clear intentions from the outset would be in their favour, considering the scrutiny they will be under.
I by no means want to see him extradited to the US, nor anyone come to think about it. I genuinely don't believe their judicial process to be fair. Maybe cultural bias, and I'm not suggesting my country is much better.
Re: Sweden tried to drop Assange extradition in 2013
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
What you suggest is actually a way. How would the auditor verify having received the complete dump though? It's not like there is a verifiable index of the material available to Wikileaks. Also I think it would be hard to satisfy the critics; next to the impossibility of securing funding for such an undertaking. On top of everything else Wikileaks would risk exposing their sources. So please don't say it's easy for W…
I do tech DD for a living and from my own experience it is very hard to fudge the record for someone who deals with this kind of thing regularly. I thought I had covered any fears about source exposure and being believable with my two suggestions for who could do this. > That happening would actually lend credence to the claim that Wikileaks is redacting for political reasons. Openleaks and the Intercept come to mind…
> I do tech DD for a living and from my own experience it is very hard to fudge the record for someone who deals with this kind of thing regularly.
I assume it would be hard to pre-redact documents to hide your omissions. Outright omission of documents from a dump would be harder to detect in my view. But I must admit I'm ignorant of the techniques available.
> I though I had covered any fears about source exposure and being believable with my two suggestions for who could do this.
Partly. In my view it's up to the sources to decide who gets to see the original dump. They chose Wikileaks. Maybe they did so for reasons we'd judge nefarious but we are not free to assume they'd agree with sharing the originals more widely.
> Openleaks and the Intercept come to mind.
Did they get dumps Wikileaks had published before? Where the version published by Wikileaks turned out to have been selectively redacted for political reasons?
Re: Sweden tried to drop Assange extradition in 2013
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
Assange isn't a document or an article.
Diplomatic bags have, in various instances, been used to transport people. The bag can essentially be any sort of container. This was usually against their will, but Assange may find it agreeable.
Please cite a believable example in modern times.
I'm pretty sure that if this was an actual option that the Ecuadorians would have jumped at it.
Re: Sweden tried to drop Assange extradition in 2013
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
Diplomatic bags have, in various instances, been used to transport people. The bag can essentially be any sort of container. This was usually against their will, but Assange may find it agreeable.
Please cite a believable example in modern times. I'm pretty sure that if this was an actual option that the Ecuadorians would have jumped at it.
These are from the Wikipedia article in the comment you replied to:
---
> In 1964, a Moroccan-born Israeli double agent named Mordechai Ben Masoud Louk (also known as Josef Dahan) was drugged, bound, and placed in a diplomatic mailing crate at the Egyptian Embassy in Rome, but was rescued by Italian authorities.[4] The box that he had been sealed into "had almost certainly been used before for human cargo,"[5] including possibly for an Egyptian military official who had defected to Italy several years before but then disappeared without a trace before reappearing under Egyptian custody and facing trial.
> In the 1984 Dikko Affair, a former Nigerian government minister, Umaru Dikko, was kidnapped and placed in a shipping crate in an attempt to transport him from the United Kingdom back to Nigeria for trial.[4] However, it was not marked as a diplomatic bag, which allowed British customs to open it.[4]
---
The Egyptian diplomatic box "almost certainly" worked as intended, and it is quite believable that the Nigerian diplomatic crate would have worked without the obvious omission.
Re: Sweden tried to drop Assange extradition in 2013
#146This whole situation is a laugh at the "democratic freedom" situation that we live today. At least in some countries ruled by a dictatorship there is no such hypocrisy.
Oh yeah, dictatorships are famously irony-free. cough Democratic People’s Republic of Korea cough
I'm not in favour of a dictatorship, but I neither think that our democracy is so much better in the current state, with border patrol with almost unlimited power for ex.
Re: Sweden tried to drop Assange extradition in 2013
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please cite a believable example in modern times. I'm pretty sure that if this was an actual option that the Ecuadorians would have jumped at it.
These are from the Wikipedia article in the comment you replied to: --- > In 1964, a Moroccan-born Israeli double agent named Mordechai Ben Masoud Louk (also known as Josef Dahan) was drugged, bound, and placed in a diplomatic mailing crate at the Egyptian Embassy in Rome, but was rescued by Italian authorities.[4] The box that he had been sealed into "had almost certainly been used before for human cargo,"[5] includ…
Ok, so, the first example makes it plain that the host country can and will open diplomatic cargo, the second is not really evidence because it did not work for different reasons.
Either way, I strongly suspect the UK government not to be so stupid not to check any container large enough to contain an Assange shaped object that is marked as diplomatic mail from the embassy in London to the home country.
It makes for a nice movie plot but it would be pretty shoddy if they went for it.
Re: Sweden tried to drop Assange extradition in 2013
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe you're not clear about the actual background. There are no charges against him in Sweden. He was ordered to be questioned related to his vile cheating trick that isn't even recognized as rape outside of Sweden. I think the guy could be called one of the biggest assholes. But let's not add to be pile of rubbish and defamation that deliberatley has been amassed regarding this case.
> isn't even recognized as rape outside of Sweden. Having sex with an unconscious person, even someone asleep, is against the law in some jurisdictions. Really depends on how they define consent (in England's case sleep is "black-letter" lack of consent). Specific to England: https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/rape-and-sexual-offenc...
> Having sex with an unconscious person, even someone asleep, is against the law
The allegation is not that he had intercourse with someone unconscious.
The allegation is that he re-initiated sexual relations with a coitus partner who was initially asleep and who then woke up, asked about a condom, then later regretted not stopping because of the lack of a condom.
There is a distinct legal difference between non-consensual intercourse with someone drugged or passed out and engaging in petting of a naked person who did the naked-nasty with you a few hours ago to see if they're keen on round 2...
Re: Sweden tried to drop Assange extradition in 2013
#149The persistence of the British CPS in pursuing Assange shows how tight the militaries are between the US and Commonwealth nations. AFAIK, Britain had no personal stake in Wikileaks / Assange. But because America badly wanted to suppress Wikileaks and its ilk from future revelations, Britain has persisted in its surrogate prosecution of Assange. I wonder, is there no blowback among Brits for the Crown so baldly adopti…
I think you need to take a closer look at the Coalition - Five Eyes nations, plus a few lap dogs - and see just how nefarious the relationship has become.
Australian Defence Force troops, for example, are a puppet military force deployed in places where it would be illegal to have American troops. ADF can get away with doing a lot of things the Americans cannot - just like their counterparts in the Israeli Defence Forces.
The truth of the matter is, there really is an inner state within our states, consisting of the coalition of military entities, and yes: they do rely on each other to do each others' dirty work. This should come as no surprise to any citizen of a Five-Eyes state; the new world order is well and truly upon us.
Re: Sweden tried to drop Assange extradition in 2013
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
Crime? I'm aware only that a charge was made against Assange by an individual for an infraction that had nothing to do with Wikileaks. This is strikingly convenient since it bypasses the introduction of any Wikileak-related evidence in Assange's prosecution, and thus prohibits it. In light of Assange's political activity, and now the astonishing level of CPS persistence in pursuing him, the Swedish charge against him…
The accusations against Assange could very well be a conspiracy involving the US, Sweden and the UK to silence wikileaks because they leaked videos of civilians being killed by American military. Or it could just be him raping or sexually assaulting two women in Sweden and the police and prosecution wanting to follow their rules and interview him about it.
> it could just be him raping or sexually assaulting two women in Sweden
1) He is not accused of that
2) If we're gonna translate legal charges we should be consistent and honest -- Assange is accused of what the rest of the world calls 'sexual misconduct'
3) This article is showing the intense and continued irregularities in this case that are so large as to be visible from orbit. Even if Assange is guilty as fuck it does not change the verifiable nature of "special" treatment he has received, implying a strong political motive
4) Conspiracy is a collaborative effort to break or subvert the law -- the national governments pissed off at Assange are asserting preferential treatment to support a political end. That's sketchy, and maybe scary, and maybe immoral, but totally legal.
5) US military and top leadership gets egg on face in every paper in the world at the same time, and gets nailed by every diplomat in the world at the same time, and... what? Says 'no biggie' and walks away? ... That is improbable. That would be historically uncharacteristic.